Worriedman

P Lets see some data showing how many criminals did not purchase a firearm becaus3 of background checks. What laws are enforced to see that criminals do NOT purchase firearms illegally?

None if WEdo not tell them...

It does not remove anything, they just can't go fishing, as long as they have " clear and convincing evidence " they can arrest. "may use standard procedures for investigating the use or threatened use of force as described in subdivision (a)(2)" do the work. Seems to work pretty well for Florida...

Mike Carter, Chairman of the House Civil Justice sub-committee will put a bullet in the head of this bill today at 9:00 AM. I have been quietly working to amend the original bill so that the Oligarchy would accept it, Sheriff's Association is agin it, "Oh God" gangs will run rampant under this new prescription, but the State itself says: "Local law enforcement contacts, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Safety, the District Attorneys General Conference, the District Public Defenders Conference, and the Administrative Office of the Courts confirm that the proposed legislation will not significantly impact their operations."

Now you begin to understand the way this tripe occurs. As long as Bill Haslam and Beth Harwell have ANYTHING to do with our governance it will not change. Diane Black, Randy Boyd, Mark Norris, Bob Corker are all cut from the same cloth. I have not seen one other person at Legislative Plaza this year in a committee hearing or walking the halls advocating for these issues, the cockroaches can feed in the middle of the room as no light is being turned on them. We have met the enemy, and he is us!

No decent firearms issue bill is going to pass this legislature, TFA does not have the money and NRA is not interested in getting involved at this time.

In Parks and Restaurants, she voted with the Democrat Governor to support his overrides on gun bills, she would do the same now, she is an anti-gun liberal who resided in a Democrat district. She is simply Naifeh in a dress...

You would never know the difference.

Tennessee's Governor does NOT support such bills. The NRA is only interested in access to the Speakers, if you want bills to pass, you must have different legislators who will elect different Speakers who will stand up to the governor. To do that you must turn out the incumbents.

Find an Establishment Rep. and Senator to write and carry those bills, (preferably a Senator who sits on Judiciary, and the House sponsor on Civil Justice) and then get Legal to allow them in the simple form you espouse, nothing to it but to do it! You might have to get a new Governor and Speaker of the House to get those sponsors though, they are a pretty tight knit group...and raise enough money to outspend the Chamber of Commerce...but hey, every House member is all about the 2nd Amendment, just listen to the stump speeches each election cycle. If any bill goes to Senate Judiciary, just remember the NRA endorsed Overbey, Stevens and Lundberg, the three Republicans you can count on to vote against every gun bill...

Yes, where is the NRA? Fiscal note: Total Local Impact Assumption: The total permissive one-time increase in local expenditures is estimated to exceed $200,000 ($100,000 + $100,000). The permissive recurring increase in local expenditures is estimated to exceed $1,000,000.

Wonder what Act II will be?

Having been intimately and financially involved in a number of legislative races, money and name recognition is ALL that counts, and one must have money to get the name recognition... Maggart is no longer in the House because the NRA got financially involved, and grass roots organizations walked and worked...Maggart insulted the NRA lobbyist and they came after her with bucks, and the Tea Party sent car loads of door knockers, we hit every likely Republican door we could. The NRA will NOT take on Harwell, she is Speaker and they will NOT loose access. It, (NRA) is crowing about every State that passes Constitutional Carry, and is already running ILA adds about it in Kentucky, urging its members there to call and write, they are not here because the governor and the speakers have already said they were against it. Sheriff's Association, Chiefs of Police, Establishment Republicans and the Chamber are the enemies of a restoration of God given firearms Rights in Tennessee, them and a fractured gun owners base.

Harwell can not be primaried, the liberals would cross over en banc to make sure she stays in power.

You should never be surprised at the lengths that Haslam will go to in order to keep his friends in control.

The author is a good friend of mine and a very intelligent individual who loves to stir the pot, that being said...depending on the reporting and the agency reported to, the use by a school absolutely could make the whole thing an infraction.

Governor and his Liberal henchmen are about the business of killing this innocuous little bill, he has "Flagged" it and his House sycophants are trying to say it is a Gang related pass for them to say if 15 shoot 12 of another tribe, it allows the 15 to claim they were afeard for their lives under cover of this bill and get off under cover of "self defense". The water carriers for the governor and Speaker are walking the halls calling in favors to stop this good bill.

Means the sponsor wrote a bill to include a specific caption, or segment of the TCA Code, that they want to work on, so they put up a broad enough "Caption" that they can amend later in session to get something done. All you can do with any bill is purportedly modify the segment of the law you originally included in your bill, but you can modify it in any way by amendment so long as it stays within its "caption". Been hanging around up there a while, Goins is one of the best, (Former Marine, honest to a fault and a friend of the firearms Rights enthusiast) what you see is what you get, he is leaning to work within the system.

Caption Bill folks, hold your water...

IANAL, but, this prevents a civil suit unless you are convicted of a crime instead of the current situation where you get your money back for legal cost and loss of earnings if you prove you were not guilty of a criminal act in a civil action... TCA 39-11-622. Justification for use of force -- Exceptions -- Immunity from civil liability. (a) (1) A person who uses force as permitted in §§ 39-11-611 -- 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201, is justified in using such force and is immune from civil liability for the use of such force, unless: (A) The person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in § 39-11-106 who: (i) Was acting in the performance of the officer's official duties; and (ii) Identified the officer in accordance with any applicable law; or (iii) The person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer; or (B) The force used by the person resulted in property damage to or the death or injury of an innocent bystander or other person against whom the force used was not justified. (b) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by a person in defense of any civil action brought against the person based upon the person's use of force, if the court finds that the defendant was justified in using such force pursuant to §§ 39-11-611 -- 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201.

Funny, United states v. Miller says weapons of war ARE covered, and only them. Which is it?

That oversight appears to have been corrected. Thanks for the heads up JayC.

Only People have Rights, governments have power allocated to them by the said People (or that is how it should work). Constitutions CAN enumerate them, (Rights) they do not however confer them.

You are correct, the word "Concealed" was inadvertently cut from the sentence, as in " bear arms concealed in some manner".

I thought Mr. Archie penned a thoughtful, fact filled and only moderately ranting response. Look for a much shorter, concise retort in the Knoxville News Sentinel shortly, or so I have been told...